| Literature DB >> 36133000 |
Noppadol Aekphachaisawat1, Kittisak Sawanyawisuth2, Sittichai Khamsai2, Watchara Boonsawat2, Somsak Tiamkao2, Panita Limpawattana2, Wanchai Maleewong3, Chetta Ngamjarus4.
Abstract
Introduction: Eosinophilic meningitis (EOM) is an emerging infectious disease worldwide. The most common cause of EOM is infection with Angiostrongylus cantonensis One possible method of monitoring and control of this infection is surveillance and prediction. There are limited data on national surveillance and predictive models on EOM. This study aimed to develop an online surveillance with a predictive model for EOM by using the national database.Entities:
Keywords: Angiostrongylus cantonensis; Disease control; Slugs; Snails; Time series analysis
Year: 2022 PMID: 36133000 PMCID: PMC9483718 DOI: 10.1016/j.parepi.2022.e00272
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasite Epidemiol Control ISSN: 2405-6731
Fig. 1Box-plots of number of eosinophilic meningitis cases in Thailand from 2003 to 2021.
Fig. 2Heat maps of median numbers of eosinophilic meningitis cases in Thailand by month and region from 2003 to 2021.
Selected model for predicting eosinophilic meningitis cases in Thailand by using statistical methods by nation data and region data with their properties.
| Area | Model | Coefficients | AIC | RMSE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nation | SARIMA(1,1,2)(2,0,0)[12] | AR1 = 0.9351, MA1 = −1.6563 | 1489.84 | 6.23 |
| Northern region | ARIMA(1,1,1) | AR1 = 0.1812, MA1 = −0.8887 | 893.34 | 1.70 |
| Western region | SARIMA(2,0,2)(1,0,2)[12] | AR1 = −1.0735, AR2 = −0.6008 | 59.72 | 0.26 |
| Central region | ARIMA(1,0,1) | AR1 = −0.4926, MA1 = 0.7308 | 456.38 | 0.65 |
| Eastern region | SARIMA(2,1,1)(1,0,0)[12] | AR1 = 0.0931, AR2 = 0.169 | 428.32 | 0.61 |
| Northeast region | SARIMA(0,1,1)(2,0,0)[12] | MA1 = −0.7039, SAR1 = 0.2621 | 1435.17 | 5.57 |
| Southern region | SARIMA(1,0,1)(1,0,1)[12] | AR1 = −0.5659, MA1 = 0.6878 | 261.84 | 0.42 |
AR1/AR2: autoregressive models of order 1and 2 respectively; MA1/MA2: the moving average models of order 1 and 2 respectively; SAR1/SAR2: seasonal autoregressive models of order 1and 2 respectively; AIC: Akaike Information Criterion; RMSE: Root mean square error.
Predicted values with their 95% confidence interval according to the model and actual cases of eosinophilic meningitis in Thailand by months and years.
| Month/year | Predicted values | Actual cases | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitted value | Lower 95% CI | Upper 95% CI | ||
| Jan-19 | 17.6 | 5.2 | 30 | 35 |
| Feb-19 | 22.5 | 10.2 | 34.9 | 8 |
| Mar-19 | 17.2 | 4.8 | 29.6 | 16 |
| Apr-19 | 15.8 | 3.4 | 28.1 | 5 |
| May-19 | 13.6 | 1.2 | 26 | 13 |
| Jun-19 | 16.4 | 4.1 | 28.8 | 10 |
| Jul-19 | 14.9 | 2.5 | 27.2 | 13 |
| Aug-19 | 14.9 | 2.6 | 27.3 | 8 |
| Sep-19 | 12.3 | −0.1 | 24.7 | 10 |
| Oct-19 | 12.9 | 0.5 | 25.2 | 11 |
| Nov-19 | 12.2 | −0.2 | 24.6 | 9 |
| Dec-19 | 11.5 | −0.9 | 23.8 | 6 |
| Jan-20 | 12.3 | −0.1 | 24.7 | 9 |
| Feb-20 | 6 | −6.3 | 18.4 | 3 |
| Mar-20 | 6.7 | −5.7 | 19 | 5 |
| Apr-20 | 4.4 | −8 | 16.8 | 5 |
| May-20 | 6.5 | −5.9 | 18.9 | 11 |
| Jun-20 | 9 | −3.4 | 21.3 | 3 |
| Jul-20 | 7.8 | −4.5 | 20.2 | 7 |
| Aug-20 | 7.5 | −4.9 | 19.9 | 3 |
| Sep-20 | 6.3 | −6.1 | 18.6 | 6 |
| Oct-20 | 7.2 | −5.2 | 19.6 | 7 |
| Nov-20 | 6.3 | −6.1 | 18.7 | 3 |
| Dec-20 | 5.5 | −6.9 | 17.9 | 4 |
| Jan-21 | 7.7 | −4.7 | 20.1 | 1 |
| Feb-21 | 1.6 | −10.8 | 14 | 5 |
| Mar-21 | 4.3 | −8.1 | 16.7 | 3 |
| Apr-21 | 2.9 | −9.4 | 15.3 | 7 |
| May-21 | 6.6 | −5.8 | 19 | 3 |
| Jun-21 | 3.7 | −8.6 | 16.1 | 2 |
| Jul-21 | 4.7 | −7.6 | 17.1 | 5 |
| Aug-21 | 3.6 | −8.8 | 16 | 4 |
| Sep-21 | 4.8 | −7.5 | 17.2 | 3 |
| Oct-21 | 4.9 | −7.5 | 17.3 | 4 |
| Nov-21 | 3.8 | −8.6 | 16.1 | 1 |
| Dec-21 | 3.1 | −9.3 | 15.4 | 2 |
Predicted value for eosinophilic meningitis cases in Thailand and categorized by regions in 2022.
| Months | Predicted value (95%CI) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nation | North | Western | Central | Eastern | Northeastern | South | |
| Jan-22 | 2.7 (−9.7, 15.1) | 0.5 (−2.9, 3.8) | 0 (−0.5, 0.6) | 0.4 (−0.9, 1.7) | 0.3 (−0.9, 1.5) | 0.8 (−10.2, 11.9) | 0.1 (−0.7, 1) |
| Feb-22 | 3.1 (−9.7, 16) | 0.4 (−3.1, 3.9) | 0.1 (−0.5, 0.6) | 0.3 (−1, 1.6) | 0.2 (−1, 1.4) | 1.1 (−10.4, 12.6) | 0.2 (−0.7, 1) |
| Mar-22 | 3.1 (−10.1, 16.4) | 0.4 (−3.2, 3.9) | 0.1 (−0.5, 0.6) | 0.3 (−1, 1.7) | 0.2 (−1, 1.5) | 1 (−11, 12.9) | 0.2 (−0.7, 1) |
| Apr-22 | 4.2 (−9.4, 17.9) | 0.4 (−3.2, 3.9) | 0.1 (−0.5, 0.6) | 0.3 (−1, 1.6) | 0.2 (−1.1, 1.5) | 1.1 (−11.3, 13.5) | 0.2 (−0.7, 1) |
| May-22 | 4.2 (−9.7, 18.2) | 0.4 (−3.2, 4) | 0.1 (−0.5, 0.6) | 0.3 (−1, 1.6) | 0.2 (−1.1, 1.5) | 1.6 (−11.2, 14.4) | 0.2 (−0.7, 1) |
| Jun-22 | 3.3 (−11, 17.5) | 0.4 (−3.3, 4) | 0.1 (−0.5, 0.6) | 0.3 (−1, 1.6) | 0.2 (−1.1, 1.5) | 0.7 (−12.5, 13.9) | 0.2 (−0.7, 1) |
CI: confidence interval.
Fig. 3Fitted, predicted values and actual value from the selected model of new cases of eosinophilic meningitis.